Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Modeling and 6E analysis of a novel quadruple combined cycle with turbocompressor gas station

  • Published:
Journal of Thermal Analysis and Calorimetry Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Natural gas compressor stations have a significant potential for waste heat recovery. In this paper, a novel quadruple combined cycle has been proposed based on a turbocompressor gas station. In this regard, Serajeh gas station in Qom (Iran), including three 25 MW nominal gas turbines that each turbine provided power requirement for compressor, has been considered. Steam and organic Rankine cycles have been used to recover waste heat and generate more power, which uses exhaust gas turbines. Seven organic fluids have been examined. Energy, Exergy, Exergoeconomic, Exergoenvironment, Emergoeconomic, and Emergoenvironmental (6E) analyses have better understood the system from different perspectives. In this regard, computer code has been developed in MATLAB for 6E analysis. Verification of thermodynamic simulation of developed code has been compared with THERMOFLEX software and reference data with high accuracy. Also, sensitivity analysis was carried out based on main parameters. Advanced exergy-based analysis associated with endogenous/exogenous and avoidable/unavoidable parts has been performed for deep analysis of each component. The results show an increase of approximately 16% in the integrated cycle's thermal efficiency compared to gas turbines. The combustion chamber has the highest exergy destruction rate, and the LP superheater and economizer have the lowest exergy efficiency. R113 was selected as the best organic fluid from thermodynamic and R141b from an economic and environmental point of view. Cost rates and environmental impacts of the entire system will be approximately 3300 $ h−1 and 2038 pts h−1, respectively.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17
Fig. 18
Fig. 19

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

HRSG:

Heat recovery steam generator

LP:

Low pressure

HP:

High pressure

Hr:

Hour

ORC:

Organic rankine cycle

RO:

Reverse osmosis

MED:

Multi-effect distillation

MSF:

Multi-stage flash

KC:

Kalina cycle

ISCC:

Integrated solar combined cycle

LNG:

Liquefied natural gas

GT:

Gas turbine

ST:

Steam turbine

ORCT:

Organic rankine cycle turbine

ACC:

Air cooled condenser

ex:

Exergy (kJ kg−1)

Q :

Heat transfer (kJ)

T :

Temperature (°C or K)

m :

Mass (kg)

W :

Work (kJ)

\(\sigma\) :

Rupturing stress (Mpa)

in:

Inlet

out:

Outlet

i:

Number of stream

F:

Fuel

P:

Product

a:

Air

fg:

Flue gas

CA:

Cooling air

h:

Enthalpy (kJ kg−1)

s:

Entropy (kJ (kg C)−1)

x:

Quality

C:

Cost of stream ($)

A:

Area (\({\text{m}}^{2}\))

vel:

Velocity (m s−1)

D:

Diameter (m)

FS:

Factor of safety

Y:

Environmental impact (Pts)

B:

Environmental impact of stream (Pts)

TIT:

Turbine inlet temperature (°C or K)

dp:

Relative pressure drop

TIP:

Turbine inlet pressure (bar)

TTD:

Terminal temperature difference (°C or K)

\(\psi\) :

Exergy efficiency

\(\eta\) :

Isentropic efficiency, thermal efficiency

ρ :

Density (kg m−3)

SC:

Steam cycle

w :

Water

s :

Isentropic

amb:

Ambient

EN:

Endogenous

EX:

Exogenous

UN:

Unavoidable

AV:

Avoidable

References

  1. Gómez-Aláez SL, Brizzy V, Alfani D, Silva P, Giostry A, Astolfi M. Off-design study of a waste heat recovery ORC module in gas pipelines recompression station. In: 4th international seminar on ORC power, vol. 129, Italy; 2017. p. 567–74.

  2. Hærvig J, Sørensen K, Condra TJ. Guidelines for optimal selection of working fluid for an organic Rankine cycle in relation to waste heat recovery. Energy. 2016;96:592–602.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Khoshgoftar Manesh MH, Abadi SK, Ghalami H, Amidpour M. Exergoeconomic evaluation of desalinated water production in pipeline gas station. In: Proceedings of the 3rd gas processing symposium, Qatar, vol. 3; 2012. p. 191–98.

  4. Bianchi M, et al. Feasibility of ORC application in natural gas compressor stations. Energy. 2019;173:1–15.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Saavedra I, Bruno JC, Coronas A. Thermodynamic optimization of organic Rankine cycles at several condensing temperatures: case study of waste heat recovery in a natural gas compressor station. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part A J Power Energy. 2010. https://doi.org/10.1243/09576509JPE998.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Kostowski W, Pajączek K, Pociecha A, Kalina J, Niedzielski P, Przybył A. Methods of waste heat recovery—a compressor station case study. Energy Convers Manag. 2019;197:111837.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Mazhari V, Abadi S.K, Ghalami H, Khoshgoftar Manesh M.H, Amidpour M. Techno-economic evaluation of using different air inlet cooling systems in gas compressor station. In: Proceedings of the 3rd gas processing symposium, Qatar; 2012. p. 295–302.

  8. Kostowski WJ, Kalina J, Bargiel P, Szuflenski P. Energy and exergy recovery in a natural gas compressor station—a technical and economic analysis. Energy Convers Manag. 2015;104:17–31.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Li J, Mohammadi A, Maleki A. Techno-economic analysis of new integrated system of humid air turbine, organic Rankine cycle, and parabolic trough collector. J Therm Anal Calorim. 2020;139:2691–703.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Lokare OR, Tavakkoli S, Rodriguez G, Khanna V, Vidic RD. Integrating membrane distillation with waste heat from natural gas compressor stations for produced water treatment in Pennsylvania. Desalination. 2017;413:144–53.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Khoshgoftar Manesh MH, Amidpour M, Khodaei Jalal Abadi H. Comparison of combined cycle and conventional steam power plant through energy level and thermoeconomic analysis. In: ASME 2008 international mechanical engineering congress and exposition; 2008. p. 66640.

  12. Nemati A, Nami H, Ranjbar F, Yari M. A comparative thermodynamic analysis of ORC and Kalina cycles for waste heat recovery: a case study for CGAM cogeneration system. Case Stud Therm Eng. 2017;9:1–13.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Shayan M, Pirouzfar V, Sakhaeinia H. Technological and economical analysis of flare recovery methods, and comparison of different steam and power generation systems. J Therm Anal Calorim. 2020;139:2399–411.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Botros KK, Price GR, Kybria G. Thermodynamic, environmental and economic assessment of exhaust gas recirculation for NOx reduction in gas turbine based compressor station. In: ASME 1999 international gas turbine and aeroengine congress and exhibition.

  15. Xenos DP, Lunde E, Thornhill NF. Optimal operation and maintenance of gas compressor stations: an integrated framework applied to a large-scale industrial case. In: Proceedings of ASME turbo expo 2015: turbine technical conference and exposition GT2015.

  16. Liu B, Liu S, Guo S, Zhang S. Economic study of a large-scale renewable hydrogen application utilizing surplus renewable energy and natural gas pipeline transportation in China. Int J Hydrog Energy. 2020;45:1385–98.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Ahmadi B, Golneshan A, Arasteh H, Karimipour A, Bach Q. Energy and exergy analysis and optimization of a gas turbine cycle coupled by a bottoming organic Rankine cycle. J Therm Anal Calorim. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10973-019-09088-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Zandi S, Golbaten Mofrad K, Salehi G, Khoshgoftar Manesh MH, Fazeli A. Multi-objective optimization and thermoeconomic analysis of a novel CCHP with TES and hybrid cooling for residential complex. Therm Sci Eng Prog. 2020;19:100656.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Golchoobian H, Taheri M, Saedodin S. Thermodynamic analysis of turboexpander and gas turbine hybrid system for gas pressure reduction station of a power plant. Case Stud Therm Eng. 2019;14:100488.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Khoshgoftar Manesh MH, Noori SA. Simulation and optimization of tehran oil refinery steam network in view of exergetic, exergoeconomic and environmental analysis. J Oil Gas Petrochem Technol. 2017;4:55–68.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Bao J, Zhao L. A review of working fluid and expander selections for organic Rankine cycle. Renew Sustain Energy Rev. 2013;24:325–42.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Saleh S, Pirouzfar V, Alihosseini VA. Performance analysis and development of a refrigeration cycle through various environmentally friendly refrigerants. J Therm Anal Calorim. 2019;136:1817–30.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Bonforte G, Buchgeister J, Manfrida G, Petela K. Exergoeconomic and exergoenvironmental analysis of an integrated solar gas turbine/combined cycle power plant. Energy. 2018;156:352–9.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Ersayin E, Ozgener L. Performance analysis of combined cycle power plants: a case study. Renew Sustain Energy Rev. 2015;43:832–42.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Ahmadi P, Dincer I, Rosen MA. Exergy, exergoeconomic and environmental analyses and evolutionary algorithm based multi-objective optimization of combined cycle power plants. Energy. 2011;36:5886–98.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Sanaye S, Amani M, Amani P. 4E modeling and multi-criteria optimization of CCHPW gas turbine plant with inlet air cooling and steam injection. Sustain Energy Technol Assess. 2018;29:70–81.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Ameri M, Mohammadzadeh M. Thermodynamic, thermoeconomic and life cycle assessment of a novel integrated solar combined cycle (ISCC) power plant. Sustain Energy Technol Assess. 2018;27:192–205.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Arabkoohsar A, Sadi M. Thermodynamics, economic and environmental analyses of a hybrid waste–solar thermal power plant. J Therm Anal Calorim. 2020;144:917–40.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Binamer AO. Al-Abdaliya integrated solar combined cycle power plant: case study of Kuwait, part I. Renew Energy. 2019;131:923–37.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Cavalcanti E. Exergoeconomic and exergoenvironmental analyses of an integrated solar combined cycle system. Renew Sustain Energy Rev. 2017;67:507–19.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Islam S, Dincer I. Development, analysis and performance assessment of a combined solar and geothermal energy-based integrated system for multigeneration. Sol Energy. 2017;147:328–43.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Nami H, Mahmoudi SMS, Nemati A. Exergy, economic and environmental impact assessment and optimization of a novel cogeneration system including a gas turbine, a supercritical CO2 and an organic Rankine cycle (GT-HRSG/SCO2). Appl Therm Eng. 2017;110:1315–30.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Mehrpooya M, Ashouri M, Mohammadi A. Thermoeconomic analysis and optimization of a regenerative two-stage organic Rankine cycle coupled with liquefied natural gas and solar energy. Energy. 2017;126:899–914.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Bagherzadeh SA, Ruhani B, Namar MM, Alamian R, Rostami S. Compression ratio energy and exergy analysis of a developed Brayton-based power cycle employing CAES and ORC. J Therm Anal Calorim. 2020;139:2781–90.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Srinivasan KK, Mago PJ, Krishnan SR. Analysis of exhaust waste heat recovery from a dual fuel low temperature combustion engine using an Organic Rankine Cycle. Energy. 2010;35:2387–99.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Adibhatla S, Kaushik SC. Energy, exergy and economic (3E) analysis of integrated solar direct steam generation combined cycle power plant. Sustain Energy Technol Assess. 2017;20:88–97.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Esmaeilzadehazimi MA, Khoshgoftar Manesh MH, Nourpour M, Majidi M. Evaluation of a novel quadruple combined cycle with the magnetohydrodynamic generator based on 6E analysis. J Energy Res Technol. 2020;143:072104.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Abadi SK, Khoshgoftar Manesh MH, Rosen MA, Amidpour M, Hamedi MH. Integration of a gas fired steam power plant with a total site utility using a new cogeneration targeting procedure. Chin J Chem Eng. 2014;22:455–68.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Khoshgoftar Manesh MH, Navid P, Blanco Marigorta AM, Amidpour M, Hamedi MH. New procedure for optimal design and evaluation of cogeneration system based on advanced exergoeconomic and exergoenvironmental analyses. Energy. 2013;59:314–33.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Khoshgoftar Manesh MH, Ameryan M. Optimal design of a solar-hybrid cogeneration cycle using Cuckoo Search algorithm. Appl Therm Eng. 2016;102:1300–13.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Khoshgoftar Manesh MH, Rosen MA. Combined cycle and steam gas-fired power plant analysis through exergoeconomic and extended combined pinch and exergy methods. Energy Eng. 2018;144:04018010.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Nouri M, Namar MM, Jahanian O. Analysis of a developed Brayton cycled CHP system using ORC and CAES based on first and second law of thermodynamics. J Therm Anal Calorim. 2019;135:1743–52.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Rafat E, Babaelahi M, Mofidipour E. Sustainability analysis of low temperature solar-driven kalina power plant using emergy concept. Int J Thermo. 2019;22:118–26.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Aghbashlo M, Rosen MA. Consolidating exergoeconomic and exergoenvironmental analyses using the emergy concept for better understanding energy conversion systems. J Clean Prod. 2018;172:696–708.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Moradi M, Ghorbani B, Shirmohammadi R, Mehrpooya M, Hamedi M-H. Developing of an integrated hybrid power generation system combined with a multi-effect desalination unit. Sustain Energy Technol Assess. 2019;3271–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seta.2019.02.002.

  46. Ghorbani B, Mehrpooya M, Sadeghzadeh M. Process development of a solar-assisted multi-production plant: Power cooling and hydrogen. Int J Hydrog Energy. 2020;45(55):30056–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2020.08.018

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Ebrahimi A, Ghorbani B, Taghavi M. Pinch and exergy evaluation of a liquid nitrogen cryogenic energy storage structure using air separation unit liquefaction hybrid process and Kalina power cycle. J Clean Prod. 2021;305127226. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.127226.

  48. Golchoobian H, Saedodin S, Ghorbani B. Exergetic and economic evaluation of a novel integrated system for trigeneration of power refrigeration and freshwater using energy recovery in natural gas pressure reduction stations. J Therm Anal Calorim. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10973-021-10607-7.

  49. Ghorbani B, Mehrpooya M, Shokri K. Developing an integrated structure for simultaneous generation of power and liquid CO2 using parabolic solar collectors solid oxide fuel cell and post-combustion CO2 separation unit. Appl Therm Eng. 2020;179115687. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2020.115687.

  50. Rahimi MJ, Ghorbani B, Amidpour M, Hamedi MH. Configuration optimization of a multi-generation plant based on biomass gasification. Energy 2021;227120457. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2021.120457.

  51. Bonyadi N, Johnson E, Baker D. Technoeconomic and exergy analysis of a solar geothermal hybrid electric power plant using a novel combined cycle. Energy Convers Manag. 2018;156:542–54.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Ezzat MF, Dincer I. Energy and exergy analyses of a novel ammonia combined power plant operating with gas turbine and solid oxide fuel cell systems. Energy. 2019;194:116750.

    Google Scholar 

  53. Barbarelli S, Berardi E, Amelio M, Scornaienchi NM. An externally fired micro combined-cycle with largely adjustable steam turbine, in a CHP system. Proc Manuf. 2020;42:532–7.

    Google Scholar 

  54. Vazini Modabber H, Khoshgoftar Manesh MH. Optimal exergetic, exergoeconomic and exergoenvironmental design of polygeneration system based on gas turbine-absorption chiller-solar parabolic trough collector units integrated with multi-effect desalination-thermal vapor compressor-reverse osmosis desalination systems. Renew Energy. 2020;165:533–52.

    Google Scholar 

  55. Ghorbani S, Khoshgoftar-Manesh MH, Nourpour M, Blanco-Marigorta AM. Exergoeconomic and exergoenvironmental analyses of an integrated SOFC-GT-ORC hybrid system. Energy. 2020;206:118151.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Energy, Environment and Biological Systems Research Lab (EEBRlab), Division of Thermal Sciences and Energy Systems, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Faculty of Technology and Engineering, University of Qom, Qom, Iran

    M. Nourpour & M. H. Khoshgoftar Manesh

Authors
  1. M. Nourpour
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. M. H. Khoshgoftar Manesh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to M. H. Khoshgoftar Manesh.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix A

Appendix A

See Table

Table 14 Thermodynamic equations of equipment
Full size table

14.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Nourpour, M., Khoshgoftar Manesh, M.H. Modeling and 6E analysis of a novel quadruple combined cycle with turbocompressor gas station. J Therm Anal Calorim 147, 5165–5197 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10973-021-10898-w

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10973-021-10898-w

Keywords

Search

Navigation